What do you guys think about if the APA has 8 member on a team and start charging all players to pay 7 dollars each nite but only 5 will be playing. Just curious will it work or not? Thanks
Apa
- Thread starter I'mdoingit
- Start date
I think that will NEVER work. IMO of course. APA LO's make plenty of money, I know mine does.I'mdoingit said:
Dom
Not a chance in hell.
GoTulane
Shizzle-rific
Hmmm...
Wow. Just another way to get more money in the coffers. Hell, I only charge people $3 to watch me play - What a bargain!!!!
Is this a league decision upcoming in your area? If so, then you might want to check out BCA. Great way to have only the players who will play that night actually show up to support the team - AND THE LEAGUE!!!
Aren't beer prices high enough?
Never see this working - unles they want to promote BCA amateur leagues.
JMHO - Michael
Wow. Just another way to get more money in the coffers. Hell, I only charge people $3 to watch me play - What a bargain!!!!
Is this a league decision upcoming in your area? If so, then you might want to check out BCA. Great way to have only the players who will play that night actually show up to support the team - AND THE LEAGUE!!!
Aren't beer prices high enough?
Never see this working - unles they want to promote BCA amateur leagues.
JMHO - Michael
If they try to do this, the net effect is that the 5 who play will pay $11.25. I know if I don't play I don't pay. Theonly exception being playoffs. If you win 3 straight and the other 2 matches aren't needed, they still have to be paid for. My team usually all pitches in to cover it.
B
B
I'mdoingit said:
Is this something that has started, or is supposed to start, in your area?
Or are you just throwing out hypotheticals?
There's a big difference, especially when it comes to posting on internet forums where half the people have reading comprehension skills.
Regardless, such a move would never fly. There's no way folks who aren't playing are going to pay a weekly fee. There would be riots, dogs and cats living together, total anarchy!
Never say never...I'm not a big fan of the APA anyway, but I could see them trying to do something like that...however, no wait, even they can't be that stupid. They'd just be shooting themselves in the foot with that move. I know I would quit if it came to that.
Some places my team plays have only one table. That means no practice. No playing on the side. Why would someone pay anything to just sit and watch. I believe this would kill the apa. My understanding is that the apa is financially sound. Why would they be looking for extra cash? The way the league makes more money is by having a system that easily bumps people up in ratings. This causes a team to break up. If the players still want to play they create two teams where there was once one. I do not believe that at this time there is any reason for the apa to look of extra income.
This simply HAS to be the OP throwing out a hypothesis. APA would not do this. The league is based around only the people playing pay fees...not the team members who don't play.
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
ScottW said:
I am not sure of this but some of my friends told me the APA in our area has already started this . I could not understand it but I quit the APA long ago. I was just curious if other areas are doing this. I was told if only 5 players show up then the team captain would have to put the extra nioney in and then collect it for the people that didn't show up. I will find out more details .
I ran into a situation where I drove an hour to go to a regional qualifier. They were going to qualify 2 out of a field of 8 players. It was supposed to be $24 to play. Only 6 people show up and we get told that the tourney cost is $192, and we all had to agree to pay $32 in order to have the tourney. I drove all that way and I wasn't going to be the guy who spoiled it for everyone, so I ponied up. Next time I will walk.
The APA is going to get their pound of flesh...
B
The APA is going to get their pound of flesh...
B
First off, this would be a local league operators decision, not an APA mandate. APA as a whole would never do this.
Second, why would they not just tell the teams that non-playing team members have to pay? Al they have to do is state the weekly dues are going up, and the increase would be handled by the teams as they see fit.
Second, why would they not just tell the teams that non-playing team members have to pay? Al they have to do is state the weekly dues are going up, and the increase would be handled by the teams as they see fit.
This is what I was going to post. Nobody should be dumb enough to say "everybody on a team has to pay $5.00 each week" when they could get to the same spot by saying "the weekly dues are $40." Charging per team member would also be silly in that it would mean a 7-person roster would pay less than an 8-person roster.soulcatcher said:
Roster
If our league operator was dumb enough to try something like that I would just pick the most consistent 4 players besides myself and cut the team down to only 5 players. Then our team fees would not change. I would also let all the other teams know what and why I was doing this so they could do the same.
If our league operator was dumb enough to try something like that I would just pick the most consistent 4 players besides myself and cut the team down to only 5 players. Then our team fees would not change. I would also let all the other teams know what and why I was doing this so they could do the same.